Life is Strange: Before the Storm

Finished episode 3 last night.

Gut punch of a post credit scene. I'd thought that they might show Jefferson just arriving at Blackwell in anticipation of the upcoming school year, as the Prescotts had just made that huge donation to the arts department of the school.

Yeah, I guess they're saving it for the "Farewell" episode with Max...

along with some of the early stuff going on with Nathan Prescott, perhaps? I wonder what's gonna happen to Samantha. Episode 3 was nice though. The part with Elliot caught me off guard haha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BDaddyK
Yeah, I guess they're saving it for the "Farewell" episode with Max...

From what I've read the "Farewell" episode takes place even before "Before the Storm". I think it's centered around Williams death and Max leaving.

along with some of the early stuff going on with Nathan Prescott, perhaps? I wonder what's gonna happen to Samantha. Episode 3 was nice though. The part with Elliot caught me off guard haha.

Deck Nine said they would be open for a season 2 of "before the Storm", there's plenty of room, BtS takes place 3 years before LiS proper.

Seeing who Rachel's mother is, and her personality/temperament, and her struggles, they're really reflected in Rachel. It especially speaks to the veracity of a lot of the rumors Regarding Rachel in Life is Strange.[/spoilers]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edge BC
Just finished Ep. 3. I didn't like it as much as the first two.
It seemed to descend into a fairly standard family drama. I felt that a lot of the scenes were overly melodramatic. There were several things that just didn't make sense. I expected them to make more use of Rachel's "power," but they just sort of dropped that, and all the paranormal we got was Dad popping in and out of existence, which means Chloe is insane but never mind that. Speaking of insane, Elliot appears out of nowhere and is suddenly a psycho control freak. So much of the episode just felt contrived to me, arranged in order to push the "drama." And it lacked the cool innovative piece like the RPG in Ep. 1 and the play in Ep. 2. It felt more like a typical TV show or movie, and one that I wouldn't have stayed tuned to, if I wasn't already invested in the story.
It was ok. I expected more, though.
 
Just finished Ep. 3. I didn't like it as much as the first two.
It seemed to descend into a fairly standard family drama. I felt that a lot of the scenes were overly melodramatic. There were several things that just didn't make sense. I expected them to make more use of Rachel's "power," but they just sort of dropped that, and all the paranormal we got was Dad popping in and out of existence, which means Chloe is insane but never mind that. Speaking of insane, Elliot appears out of nowhere and is suddenly a psycho control freak. So much of the episode just felt contrived to me, arranged in order to push the "drama." And it lacked the cool innovative piece like the RPG in Ep. 1 and the play in Ep. 2. It felt more like a typical TV show or movie, and one that I wouldn't have stayed tuned to, if I wasn't already invested in the story.
It was ok. I expected more, though.

Yeah episode 3 wasn't nearly as good as the first two, though, I still really liked the game.

Did you visit the Norths in their hospital room? I don't think Chloe is insane, they're dreams, or she's sleeping at least during them. I'd be more inclined to agree if she was awake and she was having them. I didn't really like how the third episode relegated Rachel to the hospital for the whole episode, and like you said the paranormal aspects were just dropped. However, it could be attributed to Rachel being sedated in the hospital, as the Firefighter is overheard saying the fire, just stopped. I do like that the story really fleshed out Rachel, her personality (learning about her mother really shows how she is just like her, personality/temperament wise and the in the choices she makes), and how she later gets involved with Frank, Nathan, and Jefferson at the expense of Chloe.
 
Yeah episode 3 wasn't nearly as good as the first two, though, I still really liked the game.

Yeah, that seems to be the general opinion, that the 3rd episode was the weakest, for various reasons.

Did you visit the Norths in their hospital room? I don't think Chloe is insane, they're dreams, or she's sleeping at least during them. I'd be more inclined to agree if she was awake and she was having them. I didn't really like how the third episode relegated Rachel to the hospital for the whole episode, and like you said the paranormal aspects were just dropped. However, it could be attributed to Rachel being sedated in the hospital, as the Firefighter is overheard saying the fire, just stopped. I do like that the story really fleshed out Rachel, her personality (learning about her mother really shows how she is just like her, personality/temperament wise and the in the choices she makes), and how she later gets involved with Frank, Nathan, and Jefferson at the expense of Chloe.

Yes, I visited the Norths. Would've liked to have heard more from Steph; she was one of my favorite characters.

I know Chloe is dreaming during most of the "Dad" visions, but there's a sequence near the end, where she's travelling to where Sera is being held, and Dad converses with her on the roadside and then in her truck. That happens at a point where Chloe can't and wouldn't be sleeping -- she's pressed for time, racing to rescue Sera -- and so it cannot be a dream. I don't seriously think Chloe is psychotic. I'm more commenting on the sloppy writing of that episode.

About Rachel's power -- she burned down an entire forest when she saw her Dad kissing a strange woman. And yet discovering that her Dad lied to her about who her mother was her entire life, and that he kept her from knowing her biological mother her entire life -- all of that produces nothing but an angry tirade at the dinner table? I would've thought she'd do a Talking Heads, at the very least (burning down the house). And in an angry fight with a drug dealer, no flames, just an inexplicably dumb decision to hit him in the head with a plank of wood, which gets her stabbed. I get that the fire stopped because she was sedated, but that's all they did with it.

I agree it was interesting to get to know Rachel. But the girl can start fires with her mind. That's pretty interesting. And yet, they didn't do anything with it. Max's powers were an integral part of every episode. Here, after the power was introduced, it got relegated to some distant backstory. And they didn't even talk about it, beyond that first "WTF was that?" reaction. Your best friend starts fires with her mind, and that doesn't seem worthy of discussion?

But the main thing that bothered me was what I'll call the sentimentality of the episode -- the obvious attempt to play on the heartstrings (and not very successfully). LiS had its moments of this, too, but in general was more subtle. This one (especially this episode) was like they were shouting through a megaphone: "Look how emotional the characters are! Oh my god, the drama!" And the situations aren't set up well enough, or written well enough, to really get that emotional reaction (at least from me). I'm too aware of how hard they are trying to get/manipulate an emotional effect in the audience, and so I end up feeling detached.
I don't know. Lot of weird choices in this episode. Didn't really work for me. Oh well. I was hoping they'd stick the landing, but nope. I guess they were on a tight schedule or something.
 
Yes, I visited the Norths. Would've liked to have heard more from Steph; she was one of my favorite characters.

I know Chloe is dreaming during most of the "Dad" visions, but there's a sequence near the end, where she's travelling to where Sera is being held, and Dad converses with her on the roadside and then in her truck. That happens at a point where Chloe can't and wouldn't be sleeping -- she's pressed for time, racing to rescue Sera -- and so it cannot be a dream. I don't seriously think Chloe is psychotic. I'm more commenting on the sloppy writing of that episode.

About Rachel's power -- she burned down an entire forest when she saw her Dad kissing a strange woman. And yet discovering that her Dad lied to her about who her mother was her entire life, and that he kept her from knowing her biological mother her entire life -- all of that produces nothing but an angry tirade at the dinner table? I would've thought she'd do a Talking Heads, at the very least (burning down the house). And in an angry fight with a drug dealer, no flames, just an inexplicably dumb decision to hit him in the head with a plank of wood, which gets her stabbed. I get that the fire stopped because she was sedated, but that's all they did with it.

I agree it was interesting to get to know Rachel. But the girl can start fires with her mind. That's pretty interesting. And yet, they didn't do anything with it. Max's powers were an integral part of every episode. Here, after the power was introduced, it got relegated to some distant backstory. And they didn't even talk about it, beyond that first "WTF was that?" reaction. Your best friend starts fires with her mind, and that doesn't seem worthy of discussion?

But the main thing that bothered me was what I'll call the sentimentality of the episode -- the obvious attempt to play on the heartstrings (and not very successfully). LiS had its moments of this, too, but in general was more subtle. This one (especially this episode) was like they were shouting through a megaphone: "Look how emotional the characters are! Oh my god, the drama!" And the situations aren't set up well enough, or written well enough, to really get that emotional reaction (at least from me). I'm too aware of how hard they are trying to get/manipulate an emotional effect in the audience, and so I end up feeling detached.
I don't know. Lot of weird choices in this episode. Didn't really work for me. Oh well. I was hoping they'd stick the landing, but nope. I guess they were on a tight schedule or something.

Rachel didn't really start the fire with her mind, though it alludes to her having a power over the fire when she screams and the wind whips the fire into a frenzy, and then again when the firefighters are talking about how it just went out. I too wish it delved more into that aspect, they set it up, but just left it hanging.
 
Rachel didn't really start the fire with her mind, though it alludes to her having a power over the fire when she screams and the wind whips the fire into a frenzy, and then again when the firefighters are talking about how it just went out. I too wish it delved more into that aspect, they set it up, but just left it hanging.
Yeah, she didn't start the fire, but she stoked it; I should've said "fire-stoker," not "fire-starter."

I've seen parts of the discussion at Resetera about this. I was surprised there was a debate. If they did not mean to imply that Rachel's anger stoked the fire, then they screwed up, because that was clearly implied, in the way the scene was delivered -- with the fire bursting into a conflagration at the same time as she screamed (quite a coincidence!). Also, as you mentioned, there was the way the fire suddenly and inexplicably just extinguished itself when Rachel was injured and in the hospital (another highly unlikely coincidence, and fires do not spontaneously extinguish themselves). In addition, there was the scene in the home, where the candle flames grew to about 4 times their original size, when she was angry at the dinner table. Either they meant to imply a connection between her anger and fire, or they messed up, because the implication is there, and it's made repeatedly.
 
Yeah, she didn't start the fire, but she stoked it; I should've said "fire-stoker," not "fire-starter."

I've seen parts of the discussion at Resetera about this. I was surprised there was a debate. If they did not mean to imply that Rachel's anger stoked the fire, then they screwed up, because that was clearly implied, in the way the scene was delivered -- with the fire bursting into a conflagration at the same time as she screamed (quite a coincidence!). Also, as you mentioned, there was the way the fire suddenly and inexplicably just extinguished itself when Rachel was injured and in the hospital (another highly unlikely coincidence, and fires do not spontaneously extinguish themselves). In addition, there was the scene in the home, where the candle flames grew to about 4 times their original size, when she was angry at the dinner table. Either they meant to imply a connection between her anger and fire, or they messed up, because the implication is there, and it's made repeatedly.

Oh it's definitely implied that she has some sort of connection with the fire, I mean come on, all the stuff we've been talking about! IDK if they had planned on it being a longer series, maybe 5 like the original, but it's annoying that it's teased and that's it.
 
The bonus episode isn't worth it, unless you're a huge fan of the Max/Chloe relationship and just have to know more about it.

It wasn't for me. I got bored fast. I like LiS, but I'm not a super-fan the way some people are (I see a lot in the LiS threads on GAF/Resetera; they really get into it). This episode is for those people; it's fan service.

It was way too syrupy and sentimental for me. It's all about the minutae of their friendship. Very mundane, imo. I ended up skimming through a Youtube of it. Meh.
 
The bonus episode isn't worth it, unless you're a huge fan of the Max/Chloe relationship and just have to know more about it.

It wasn't for me. I got bored fast. I like LiS, but I'm not a super-fan the way some people are (I see a lot in the LiS threads on GAF/Resetera; they really get into it). This episode is for those people; it's fan service.

It was way too syrupy and sentimental for me. It's all about the minutae of their friendship. Very mundane, imo. I ended up skimming through a Youtube of it. Meh.

Damn, didn't even know it was out. I'll have to check it out, even though I'm not really stoked about the time frame.
 
The Farewell episode

giphy.gif